H.R.2856 - Great Lakes and National Weather Service Funding Protection Act (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.2856, the Great Lakes and National Weather Service Funding Protection Act, aims to limit the ability of the executive branch to impound, transfer, or reprogram funds allocated to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), specifically those earmarked for the National Weather Service and the Great Lakes region. The bill requires specific statutory authority enacted after the bill's enactment to allow for any such actions. The Administrator of NOAA must certify compliance with the Act annually to relevant congressional committees.
Expected Effects
The bill would restrict the executive branch's flexibility in managing NOAA's budget, potentially ensuring more stable funding for the National Weather Service and Great Lakes initiatives. This could lead to more predictable and consistent operations for these critical services. However, it could also limit the ability to respond quickly to unforeseen circumstances or shifting priorities.
Potential Benefits
- Enhanced stability and predictability for National Weather Service and Great Lakes funding.
- Reduced risk of politically motivated budget cuts or reallocations.
- Greater ability for NOAA to plan long-term projects and initiatives.
- Increased transparency and accountability through annual certification requirements.
- Potential for improved weather forecasting and Great Lakes ecosystem management.
Potential Disadvantages
- Reduced executive branch flexibility in responding to emergencies or changing priorities.
- Potential for inefficient allocation of resources if needs shift.
- Increased bureaucratic burden due to certification requirements.
- Risk of hindering innovative projects if funding is rigidly fixed.
- Possible conflicts with the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, requiring careful legal interpretation.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutional alignment is complex. Congress has the power of the purse (Article I, Section 9, Clause 7), granting it broad authority to appropriate funds. However, the executive branch also has certain implied powers to manage and execute laws. The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 already addresses some aspects of this balance. This bill seeks to further define those limits, which could be subject to constitutional challenge if deemed to unduly infringe on executive authority.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).